Efficacy and Safety of Panitumumab in Patients With RAF/RAS-Wild-Type Glioblastoma: Results From the Drug Rediscovery Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of malignant primary high-grade brain tumors, predominantly glioblastomas, is poor despite intensive multimodality treatment options. In more than 50% of patients with glioblastomas, potentially targetable mutations are present, including rearrangements, altered splicing, and/or focal amplifications of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) by signaling through the RAF/RAS pathway. We studied whether treatment with the clinically available anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody panitumumab provides clinical benefit for patients with RAF/RAS-wild-type (wt) glioblastomas in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP). METHODS: Patients with progression of treatment refractory RAF/RASwt glioblastoma were included for treatment with panitumumab in DRUP when measurable according to RANO criteria. The primary endpoints of this study are clinical benefit (CB: defined as confirmed objective response [OR] or stable disease [SD] ≥ 16 weeks) and safety. Patients were enrolled using a Simon-like 2-stage model, with 8 patients in stage 1 and up to 24 patients in stage 2 if at least 1 in 8 patients had CB in stage 1. RESULTS: Between 03-2018 and 02-2022, 24 evaluable patients were treated. CB was observed in 5 patients (21%), including 2 patients with partial response (8.3%) and 3 patients with SD ≥ 16 weeks (12.5%). After median follow-up of 15 months, median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.7 months (95% CI 1.6-2.1 months) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-8.6 months), respectively. No unexpected toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Panitumumab treatment provides limited CB in patients with recurrent RAF/RASwt glioblastoma precluding further development of this therapeutic strategy.

Next generation sequencing of high-grade adult-type diffuse glioma in the Netherlands: interlaboratory variation in the primary diagnostic and recurrent setting.

PURPOSE: Next generation sequencing (NGS) is an important tool used in clinical practice to obtain the required molecular information for accurate diagnostics of high-grade adult-type diffuse glioma (HGG). Since individual centers use either in-house produced or standardized panels, interlaboratory variation could play a role in the practice of HGG diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to investigate the current practice in NGS application for both primary and recurrent HGG. METHODS: This nationwide Dutch survey used the expertise of (neuro)pathologists and clinical scientists in molecular pathology (CSMPs) by sending online questionnaires on clinical and technical aspects. Primary outcome was an overview of panel composition in the different centers for diagnostic practice of HGG. Secondary outcomes included practice for recurrent HGG and future perspectives. RESULTS: Out of twelve neuro-oncology centers, the survey was filled out by eleven (neuro)pathologists and seven CSMPs. The composition of the diagnostic NGS panels differed in each center with numbers of genes ranging from 12 to 523. Differences are more pronounced when tests are performed to find therapeutic targets in the case of recurrent disease: about half of the centers test for gene fusions (60%) and tumor mutational burden (40%). CONCLUSION: Current notable interlaboratory variations as illustrated in this study should be reduced in order to refine diagnostics and improve precision oncology. In-house developed tests, standardized panels and routine application of broad gene panels all have their own advantages and disadvantages. Future research would be of interest to study the clinical impact of variation in diagnostic approaches.

Whole genome sequencing in (recurrent) glioblastoma: challenges related to informed consent procedures and data sharing.

Increased use of whole genome sequencing (WGS) in neuro-oncology for diagnostics and research purposes necessitates a renewed conversation about informed consent procedures and governance structures for sharing personal health data. There is currently no consensus on how to obtain informed consent for WGS in this population. In this narrative review, we analyze the formats and contents of frameworks suggested in literature for WGS in oncology and assess their benefits and limitations. We discuss applicability, specific challenges, and legal context for patients with (recurrent) glioblastoma. This population is characterized by the rarity of the disease, extremely limited prognosis, and the correlation of the stage of the disease with cognitive abilities. Since this has implications for the informed consent procedure for WGS, we suggest that the content of informed consent should be tailor-made for (recurrent) glioblastoma patients.

Limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in advanced cancers with cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations in the Dutch DRUP and Australian MoST trials.

The Dutch Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) and the Australian Cancer Molecular Screening and Therapeutic (MoST) Program are similar nonrandomized, multidrug, pan-cancer trial platforms that aim to identify signals of clinical activity of molecularly matched targeted therapies or immunotherapies outside their approved indications. Here, we report results for advanced or metastatic cancer patients with tumors harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors palbociclib or ribociclib. We included adult patients that had therapy-refractory solid malignancies with the following alterations: amplifications of CDK4, CDK6, CCND1, CCND2 or CCND3, or complete loss of CDKN2A or SMARCA4. Within MoST, all patients were treated with palbociclib, whereas in DRUP, palbociclib and ribociclib were assigned to different cohorts (defined by tumor type and alteration). The primary endpoint for this combined analysis was clinical benefit, defined as confirmed objective response or stable disease ≥16 weeks. We treated 139 patients with a broad variety of tumor types; 116 with palbociclib and 23 with ribociclib. In 112 evaluable patients, the objective response rate was 0% and clinical benefit rate at 16 weeks was 15%. Median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% CI: 3-5 months), and median overall survival 5 months (95% CI: 4-6 months). In conclusion, only limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in patients with pretreated cancers harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations was observed. Our findings indicate that monotherapy use of palbociclib or ribociclib is not recommended and that merging data of two similar precision oncology trials is feasible.

Prevalence and Predictors of Physician-Patient Discordance in Prognostic Perceptions in Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Discordance between physicians' and patients' prognostic perceptions in advanced cancer care threatens informed medical decision-making and end-of-life preparation, yet this phenomenon is poorly understood. We sought to: (1) describe the extent and direction of prognostic discordance, patients' prognostic information preferences in cases of prognostic discordance, and physicians' awareness of prognostic discordance; and (2) examine which patient, physician, and caregiver factors predict prognostic discordance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Oncologists and advanced cancer patients (median survival ≤12 months; n = 515) from 7 Dutch hospitals completed structured surveys in a cross-sectional study. Prognostic discordance was operationalized by comparing physicians' and patients' perceptions of the likelihood of cure, 2-year mortality risk, and 1-year mortality risk. RESULTS: Prognostic discordance occurred in 20% (likelihood of cure), 24%, and 35% (2-year and 1-year mortality risk) of physician-patient dyads, most often involving patients with more optimistic perceptions than their physician. Among patients demonstrating prognostic discordance, the proportion who preferred not knowing prognosis varied from 7% (likelihood of cure) to 37% (1-year mortality risk), and 45% (2-year mortality risk). Agreement between physician-perceived and observed prognostic discordance or concordance was poor (kappa = 0.186). Prognostic discordance was associated with several patient factors (stronger fighting spirit, self-reported absence of prognostic discussions, an information source other than the healthcare provider), and greater physician-reported uncertainty about prognosis. CONCLUSION: Up to one-third of the patients perceive prognosis discordantly from their physician, among whom a substantial proportion prefers not knowing prognosis. Most physicians lack awareness of prognostic discordance, raising the need to explore patients' prognostic information preferences and perceptions, and to tailor prognostic communication.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAFV600E-mutant low-grade and high-grade glioma (ROAR): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2, basket trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective treatments are needed to improve outcomes for high-grade glioma and low-grade glioma. The activity and safety of dabrafenib plus trametinib were evaluated in adult patients with recurrent or progressive BRAFV600E mutation-positive high-grade glioma and low-grade glioma. METHODS: This study is part of an ongoing open-label, single-arm, phase 2 Rare Oncology Agnostic Research (ROAR) basket trial at 27 community and academic cancer centres in 13 countries (Austria, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, and the USA). The study enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2. Patients with BRAFV600E mutation-positive high-grade glioma and low-grade glioma received dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib 2 mg once daily orally until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or death. In the high-grade glioma cohort, patients were required to have measurable disease at baseline using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology high-grade glioma response criteria and have been treated previously with radiotherapy and first-line chemotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Patients with low-grade glioma were required to have measurable non-enhancing disease (except pilocytic astrocytoma) at baseline using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology low-grade glioma criteria. The primary endpoint, in the evaluable intention-to-treat population, was investigator-assessed objective response rate (complete response plus partial response for high-grade glioma and complete response plus partial response plus minor response for low-grade glioma). This trial is ongoing, but is closed for enrolment, NCT02034110. FINDINGS: Between April 17, 2014, and July 25, 2018, 45 patients (31 with glioblastoma) were enrolled into the high-grade glioma cohort and 13 patients were enrolled into the low-grade glioma cohort. The results presented here are based on interim analysis 16 (data cutoff Sept 14, 2020). In the high-grade glioma cohort, median follow-up was 12·7 months (IQR 5·4-32·3) and 15 (33%; 95% CI 20-49) of 45 patients had an objective response by investigator assessment, including three complete responses and 12 partial responses. In the low-grade glioma cohort, median follow-up was 32·2 months (IQR 25·1-47·8). Nine (69%; 95% CI 39-91) of 13 patients had an objective response by investigator assessment, including one complete response, six partial responses, and two minor responses. Grade 3 or worse adverse events were reported in 31 (53%) patients, the most common being fatigue (five [9%]), decreased neutrophil count (five [9%]), headache (three [5%]), and neutropenia (three [5%]). INTERPRETATION: Dabrafenib plus trametinib showed clinically meaningful activity in patients with BRAFV600E mutation-positive recurrent or refractory high-grade glioma and low-grade glioma, with a safety profile consistent with that in other indications. BRAFV600E testing could potentially be adopted in clinical practice for patients with glioma. FUNDING: Novartis.

Characteristics of patients with advanced cancer preferring not to know prognosis: a multicenter survey study.

BACKGROUND: For some patients with advanced cancer not knowing prognosis is essential. Yet, in an era of informed decision-making, the potential protective function of unawareness is easily overlooked. We aimed to investigate 1) the proportion of advanced cancer patients preferring not to know prognosis; 2) the reasons underlying patients' prognostic information preference; 3) the characteristics associated with patients' prognostic information preference; and 4) the concordance between physicians' perceived and patients' actual prognostic information preference. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study with structured surveys (PROSPECT). Medical and thoracic oncologists included patients (n = 524), from seven Dutch hospitals, with metastatic/inoperable cancer and an expected median overall survival of ≤ 12 months. For analysis, descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: Twenty-five to 31% of patients preferred not to know a general life expectancy estimate or the 5/2/1-year mortality risk. Compared to patients preferring to know prognosis, patients preferring unawareness more often reported optimism, avoidance and inability to comprehend information as reasons for wanting limited information; and less often reported expectations of others, anxiety, autonomy and a sense of control as reasons for wanting complete information. Females (p < .05), patients receiving a further line of systemic treatment (p < .01) and patients with strong fighting spirit (p < .001) were more likely to prefer not to know prognosis. Concordance between physicians' perceived and patients' actual prognostic information preference was poor (kappa = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: We encourage physicians to explore patients' prognostic information preferences and the underlying reasons explicitly, enabling individually tailored communication. Future studies may investigate changes in patients' prognostic information preferences over time and examine the impact of prognostic disclosure on patients who prefer unawareness.

Perfusion imaging with arterial spin labeling (ASL)-MRI predicts malignant progression in low­grade (WHO grade II) gliomas.

PURPOSE: Predicting malignant progression of grade II gliomas would allow for earlier initiation of treatment. The hypothesis for this single-centre, case-control study was that the perfusion signal on ASL-MRI predicts such malignant progression in the following 12 months. METHODS: Consecutive patients with the following criteria were included: ≥ 18 years, grade II glioma (biopsied or resected) and an ASL-MRI 6-12 months prior to malignant progression (cases) or stable disease (controls). Malignant progression was defined either radiologically (new T1w-contrast enhancement) or histologically (neurosurgical tissue sampling). Three controls were matched with each case. Some patients served as their own control by using earlier imaging. The ASL-MRIs were reviewed by two neuroradiologists and classified as positive (hyper-intense or iso-intense compared to cortical grey matter) or negative (hypo-intense). In patients with epilepsy, a neurologist reviewed clinicoradiological data to exclude peri-ictal pseudoprogression. The statistical analysis included diagnostic test properties, a Cohen's Kappa interrater reliability coefficient and stratification for previous radiotherapy. RESULTS: Eleven cases (median age = 48, IQR = 43-50 years) and 33 controls (43, 27-50 years) were included. Malignant progression appeared at 37 months (median, IQR = 17-44) after first surgery. Thirty ASL-MRIs were assessed as negative and 14 as positive. None of the MRIs showed signs of peri-ictal pseudoprogression. ASL significantly predicted subsequent malignant progression (sensitivity = 73%; specificity = 82%; OR = 12; 95%-CI = 2.4-59.1; p = 0.002). The interrater reliability coefficient was 0.65. In stratified analysis, ASL-MRI predicted malignant progression both in patients with previous radiotherapy and in those without (Mantel-Haenszel test, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Perfusion imaging with ASL-MRI can predict malignant progression within 12 months in patients with grade II glioma.

Phase 1 study of the pan-HER inhibitor dacomitinib plus the MEK1/2 inhibitor PD-0325901 in patients with KRAS-mutation-positive colorectal, non-small-cell lung and pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in KRAS result in a constitutively activated MAPK pathway. In KRAS-mutant tumours existing treatment options, e.g. MEK inhibition, have limited efficacy due to resistance through feedback activation of epidermal growth factor receptors (HER). METHODS: In this Phase 1 study, the pan-HER inhibitor dacomitinib was combined with the MEK1/2 inhibitor PD-0325901 in patients with KRAS-mutant colorectal, pancreatic and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients received escalating oral doses of once daily dacomitinib and twice daily PD-0325901 to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02039336). RESULTS: Eight out of 41 evaluable patients (27 colorectal cancer, 11 NSCLC and 3 pancreatic cancer) among 8 dose levels experienced dose-limiting toxicities. The RP2D with continuous dacomitinib dosing was 15 mg of dacomitinib plus 6 mg of PD-0325901 (21 days on/7 days off), but major toxicity, including rash (85%), diarrhoea (88%) and nausea (63%), precluded long-term treatment. Therefore, other intermittent schedules were explored, which only slightly improved toxicity. Tumour regression was seen in eight patients with the longest treatment duration (median 102 days) in NSCLC. CONCLUSIONS: Although preliminary signs of antitumour activity in NSCLC were seen, we do not recommend further exploration of this combination in KRAS-mutant patients due to its negative safety profile.

Effect of a Skills Training for Oncologists and a Patient Communication Aid on Shared Decision Making About Palliative Systemic Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Palliative systematic treatment offers uncertain and often limited benefits, and the burden can be high. Hence, treatment decisions require shared decision making (SDM). This trial examined the independent and combined effect of an oncologist training and a patient communication aid on SDM. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial with four parallel arms (2016-2018), oncologists (n = 31) were randomized to receive SDM communication skills training or not. The training consisted of a reader, two group sessions, a booster session, and a consultation room tool (10 hours). Patients (n = 194) with advanced cancer were randomized to receive a patient communication aid or not. The aid consisted of education on SDM, a question prompt list, and a value clarification exercise. The primary outcome was observed SDM as rated by blinded observers from audio-recorded consultations. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported SDM, patient and oncologist satisfaction, patients' decisional conflict, patient quality of life 3 months after consultation, consultation duration, and the decision made. RESULTS: The oncologist training had a large positive effect on observed SDM (Cohen's d = 1.12) and on patient-reported SDM (d = 0.73). The patient communication aid did not improve SDM. The combination of interventions did not add to the effect of training oncologists only. The interventions affected neither patient nor oncologist satisfaction with the consultation nor patients' decisional conflict, quality of life, consultation duration, or the decision made. CONCLUSION: Training medical oncologists in SDM about palliative systemic treatment improves both observed and patient-reported SDM. A patient communication aid does not. The incorporation of skills training in (continuing) educational programs for medical oncologists is likely to stimulate the widely advocated uptake of shared decision making in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry NTR 5489. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Treatment for advanced cancer offers uncertain and often small benefits, and the burden can be high. Hence, treatment decisions require shared decision making (SDM). SDM is increasingly advocated for ethical reasons and for its beneficial effect on patient outcomes. Few initiatives to stimulate SDM are evaluated in robust designs. This randomized controlled trial shows that training medical oncologists improves both observed and patient-reported SDM in clinical encounters (n = 194). A preconsultation communication aid for patients did not add to the effect of training oncologists. SDM training effectively changes oncologists' practice and should be implemented in (continuing) educational programs.

Reducing uncertainty: motivations and consequences of seeking a second opinion in oncology.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients increasingly seek second opinion (SO) consultations, but there is scarce empirical evidence to substantiate medical and psychological benefits for patients. This is the first study to examine patient- and oncologist-reported (1) motivations and expectations of patients to seek a SO, (2) the perceived medical outcome, and (3) psychological consequences of SOs over time (i.e. patients' uncertainty and anxiety). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This multi-informant longitudinal cohort study (SO-COM) included consecutive cancer patients referred for a SO (N = 70; age 28-85), as well as their referring and consulting oncologists. Outcome measures were completed at three time points: Patients and referring oncologists reported motivations and expectations before the SO (T0), patients and consulting oncologists reported the medical outcome of the SO (i.e. discrepancy between first and second opinion) immediately following the SO (T1), and patients reported their uncertainty and anxiety at T0, T1, and two months following the SO (T2). RESULTS: Cancer patients most frequently reported wanting expert advice, exhausting all options, and/or needing more information as motivations for SOs. Referring oncologists rather accurately anticipated these motivations, except most did not recognize patients' information needs. The vast majority of patients (90.0%) received a medical advice similar to the first opinion, although 65.7% had expected to receive a different opinion. Patients' uncertainty (F = 6.82, p=.002; η2 =.22), but not anxiety (F = 3.074, p=.055, η2 =.11) was significantly reduced after the SO. CONCLUSIONS: SOs can yield psychological benefits by reducing patients' uncertainty, but the added medical value remains debatable. Referring oncologists may not be fully aware of their patients' information needs. Patients should be better informed about goals and benefits of SOs to better manage their expectations. More cost-effective ways of optimally providing medically and psychologically valuable SOs need to be explored.

Training for Medical Oncologists on Shared Decision-Making About Palliative Chemotherapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Systemic treatment for advanced cancer offers uncertain and sometimes limited benefit, while the burden can be high. This study examines the effect of shared decision-making (SDM) training for medical oncologists on observed SDM in standardized patient assessments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial comparing training with standard practice was conducted. Medical oncologists and oncologists-in-training (n = 31) participated in a video-recorded, standardized patient assessment at baseline (T0) and after 4 months (T1, after training). The training was based on a four-stage SDM model and consisted of a reader, two group sessions (3.5 hours each), a booster session (1.5 hours), and a consultation card. The primary outcome was observed SDM as assessed with the Observing Patient Involvement scale (OPTION12) coded by observers blinded for arm. Secondary outcomes were observed SDM per stage, communication skills, and oncologists' satisfaction with communication. RESULTS: The training had a significant and large effect on observed SDM in the simulated consultations (Cohen's f = 0.62) and improved observed SDM behavior in all four SDM stages (f = 0.39-0.72). The training improved oncologists' information provision skills (f = 0.77), skills related to anticipating/responding to emotions (f = 0.42), and their satisfaction with the consultation (f = 0.53). CONCLUSION: Training medical oncologists in SDM about palliative systemic treatment improves their performance in simulated consultations. The next step is to examine the effect of such training on SDM in clinical practice and on patient outcomes. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Systemic treatment for advanced cancer offers uncertain and sometimes limited benefit, while the burden can be high. Hence, applying the premises of shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended. SDM is increasingly advocated based on the ethical imperative to provide patient-centered care and the increasing evidence for beneficial patient outcomes. Few studies examined the effectiveness of SDM training in robust designs. This randomized controlled trial demonstrated that SDM training (10 hours) improves oncologists' performance in consultations with standardized patients. The next step is to examine the effect of training on oncologists' performance and patient outcomes in clinical practice.

Bevacizumab and temozolomide in patients with first recurrence of WHO grade II and III glioma, without 1p/19q co-deletion (TAVAREC): a randomised controlled phase 2 EORTC trial.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab is frequently used in the treatment of recurrent WHO grade II and III glioma, but without supporting evidence from randomised trials. Therefore, we assessed the use of bevacizumab in patients with first recurrence of grade II or III glioma who did not have 1p/19q co-deletion. METHODS: The TAVAREC trial was a randomised, open-label phase 2 trial done at 32 centres across Europe in patients with locally diagnosed grade II or III glioma without 1p/19q co-deletion, with a first and contrast-enhancing recurrence after initial radiotherapy or chemotherapy, or both. Previous chemotherapy must have been stopped at least 6 months before enrolment and radiotherapy must have been stopped at least 3 months before enrolment. Random group assignment was done electronically through the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer web-based system, stratified by a minimisation procedure using institution, initial histology (WHO grade II vs III), WHO performance status (0 or 1 vs 2), and previous treatment (radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or both). Patients were assigned to receive either temozolomide (150-200 mg/m2, orally) monotherapy on days 1-5 every 4 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles, or the same temozolomide regimen in combination with bevacizumab (10 mg/kg, intravenously) every 2 weeks until progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 12 months in the per-protocol population. Safety analyses were done in all patients who started their allocated treatment. The study is registered at EudraCT (2009-017422-39) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01164189), and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Feb 8, 2011, and July 31, 2015, 155 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either monotherapy (n=77) or combination therapy (n=78). Overall survival in the per-protocol population at 12 months was achieved by 44 (61% [80% CI 53-69]) of 72 patients in the temozolomide group and 38 (55% [47-69]) of 69 in the combination group. The most frequent toxicity was haematological: 17 (23%) of 75 patients in the monotherapy group and 25 (33%) of 76 in the combination group developed grade 3 or 4 haematological toxicity. Other than haematological toxicities, the most common adverse events were nervous system disorders (59 [79%] of 75 patients in the monotherapy group vs 65 [86%] of 76 in the combination group), fatigue (53 [70%] vs 61 [80%]), and nausea (39 [52%] vs 43 [56%]). Infections were more frequently reported in the combination group (29 [38%] of 76 patients) than in the monotherapy group (17 [23%] of 75). One treatment-related death was reported in the combination group (infection after intratumoral haemorrhage during a treatment-related grade 4 thrombocytopenia). INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence of improved overall survival with bevacizumab and temozolomide combination treatment versus temozolomide monotherapy. The findings from this study provide no support for further phase 3 studies on the role of bevacizumab in this disease. FUNDING: Roche Pharmaceuticals.

Prevalence of symptoms in glioma patients throughout the disease trajectory: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Glioma patients suffer from a wide range of symptoms which influence quality of life negatively. The aim of this review is to give an overview of symptoms most prevalent in glioma patients throughout the total disease trajectory, to be used as a basis for the development of a specific glioma Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) for early assessment and monitoring of symptoms in glioma patients. METHODS: A systematic review focused on symptom prevalence in glioma patients in different phases of disease and treatment was performed in MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE according to PRISMA recommendations. We calculated weighted means for prevalence rates per symptom. RESULTS: The search identified 2.074 unique papers, of which 32 were included in this review. In total 25 symptoms were identified. The ten most prevalent symptoms were: seizures (37%), cognitive deficits (36%), drowsiness (35%), dysphagia (30%), headache (27%), confusion (27%), aphasia (24%), motor deficits (21%), fatigue (20%) and dyspnea (20%). CONCLUSIONS: Eight out of ten of the most prevalent symptoms in glioma patients are related to the central nervous system and therefore specific for glioma. Our findings emphasize the importance of tailored symptom care for glioma patients and may aid in the development of specific PROMs for glioma patients in different phases of the disease.

Venous thromboembolism and intracranial hemorrhage after craniotomy for primary malignant brain tumors: a National Surgical Quality Improvement Program analysis.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), frequently complicates the postoperative course of primary malignant brain tumor patients. Thromboprophylactic anticoagulation is commonly used to prevent VTE at the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). We extracted all patients who underwent craniotomy for a primary malignant brain tumor from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) registry (2005-2015) to perform a time-to-event analysis and identify relevant predictors of DVT, PE, and ICH within 30 days after surgery. Among the 7376 identified patients, the complication rates were 2.6, 1.5, and 1.3% for DVT, PE, and ICH, respectively. VTE was the second-most common major complication and third-most common reason for readmission. ICH was the most common reason for reoperation. The increased risk of VTE extends beyond the period of hospitalization, especially for PE, whereas ICH occurred predominantly within the first days after surgery. Older age and higher BMI were overall predictors of VTE. Dependent functional status and longer operative times were predictive for VTE during hospitalization, but not for post-discharge events. Admission two or more days before surgery was predictive for DVT, but not for PE. Preoperative steroid usage and male gender were predictive for post-discharge DVT and PE, respectively. ICH was associated with various comorbidities and longer operative times. This multicenter study demonstrates distinct critical time periods for the development of thrombotic and hemorrhagic events after craniotomy. Furthermore, the VTE risk profile depends on the type of VTE (DVT vs. PE) and clinical setting (hospitalized vs. post-discharge patients).

A dose escalating phase I study of GLPG0187, a broad spectrum integrin receptor antagonist, in adult patients with progressive high-grade glioma and other advanced solid malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Integrin signaling is an attractive target for anti-cancer treatment. GLPG0187 is a broad spectrum integrin receptor antagonist (IRA). GLPG0187 inhibited tumor growth and metastasis in mouse models. METHODS: We aimed to determine the Recommended Phase II Dose (RP2D) and to assess safety and tolerability of continuous i.v. infusion in patients with advanced malignant solid tumors. Anticipated dose levels were 20, 40, 80, 160, 320, and 400 mg/day in a modified 3 + 3 design. Plasma concentrations of GLPG0187 were assessed to characterize the pharmacokinetics (PK). C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) was used as pharmacodynamics marker. RESULTS: Twenty patients received GLPG0187. No dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. The highest possible and tested dose was 400 mg/day. Fatigue was the most frequently reported side effect (25%). Recurrent Port-A-Cath-related infections and skin toxicity suggest cutaneous integrin inhibition. No dose-dependent toxicity could be established. PK analysis showed a short average distribution (0.16 h) and elimination (3.8 h) half-life. Continuous infusion resulted in dose proportional PK profiles. We observed decreases in serum CTX levels independent of the dose given, suggesting target engagement at the lowest dose level tested. Single agent treatment did not result in tumor responses. CONCLUSIONS: GLPG0187 was well tolerated with a dose-proportional PK profile upon continuous infusion. No formal maximal tolerated dose could be established. GLPG0187 showed signs of target engagement with a favourable toxicity profile. However, continuous infusion of GLPG0187 failed to show signs of monotherapy efficacy.

Single-agent bevacizumab or lomustine versus a combination of bevacizumab plus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (BELOB trial): a randomised controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for recurrent glioblastoma are scarce, with second-line chemotherapy showing only modest activity against the tumour. Despite the absence of well controlled trials, bevacizumab is widely used in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. Nonetheless, whether the high response rates reported after treatment with this drug translate into an overall survival benefit remains unclear. We report the results of the first randomised controlled phase 2 trial of bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma. METHODS: The BELOB trial was an open-label, three-group, multicentre phase 2 study undertaken in 14 hospitals in the Netherlands. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a first recurrence of a glioblastoma after temozolomide chemoradiotherapy were randomly allocated by a web-based program to treatment with oral lomustine 110 mg/m(2) once every 6 weeks, intravenous bevacizumab 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks, or combination treatment with lomustine 110 mg/m(2) every 6 weeks and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Randomisation of patients was stratified with a minimisation procedure, in which the stratification factors were centre, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and age. The primary outcome was overall survival at 9 months, analysed by intention to treat. A safety analysis was planned after the first ten patients completed two cycles of 6 weeks in the combination treatment group. This trial is registered with the Nederlands Trial Register (www.trialregister.nl, number NTR1929). FINDINGS: Between Dec 11, 2009, and Nov 10, 2011, 153 patients were enrolled. The preplanned safety analysis was done after eight patients had been treated, because of haematological adverse events (three patients had grade 3 thrombocytopenia and two had grade 4 thrombocytopenia) which reduced bevacizumab dose intensity; the lomustine dose in the combination treatment group was thereafter reduced to 90 mg/m(2). Thus, in addition to the eight patients who were randomly assigned to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 110 mg/m(2), 51 patients were assigned to receive bevacizumab alone, 47 to receive lomustine alone, and 47 to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 90 mg/m(2). Of these patients, 50 in the bevacizumab alone group, 46 in the lomustine alone group, and 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group were eligible for analyses. 9-month overall survival was 43% (95% CI 29-57) in the lomustine group, 38% (25-51) in the bevacizumab group, 59% (43-72) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group, 87% (39-98) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 110 mg/m(2) group, and 63% (49-75) for the combined bevacizumab and lomustine groups. After the reduction in lomustine dose in the combination group, the combined treatment was well tolerated. The most frequent grade 3 or worse toxicities were hypertension (13 [26%] of 50 patients in the bevacizumab group, three [7%] of 46 in the lomustine group, and 11 [25%] of 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m(2) group), fatigue (two [4%], four [9%], and eight [18%]), and infections (three [6%], two [4%], and five [11%]). At the time of this analysis, 144/148 (97%) of patients had died and three (2%) were still on treatment. INTERPRETATION: The combination of bevacizumab and lomustine met prespecified criteria for assessment of this treatment in further phase 3 studies. However, the results in the bevacizumab alone group do not justify further studies of this treatment. FUNDING: Roche Nederland and KWF Kankerbestrijding.

Focused Ultrasound-Enhanced Liquid Biopsy: A Promising Diagnostic Tool for Brain Tumor Patients.

The performance of minimally invasive molecular diagnostic tools in brain tumors, such as liquid biopsy, has so far been limited by the blood-brain barrier (BBB). The BBB hinders the release of brain tumor biomarkers into the bloodstream. The use of focused ultrasound in conjunction with microbubbles has been shown to temporarily open the BBB (FUS-BBBO). This may enhance blood-based tumor biomarker levels. This systematic review provides an overview of the data regarding FUS-BBBO-enhanced liquid biopsy for primary brain tumors. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and Embase databases with key terms "brain tumors", "liquid biopsy", "FUS" and their synonyms, in accordance with PRISMA statement guidelines. Five preclinical and two clinical studies were included. Preclinical studies utilized mouse, rat and porcine glioma models. Biomarker levels were found to be higher in sonicated groups compared to control groups. Both stable and inertial microbubble cavitation increased biomarker levels, whereas only inertial cavitation induced microhemorrhages. In clinical studies involving 14 patients with high-grade brain tumors, biomarker levels were increased after FUS-BBBO with stable cavitation. In conclusion, FUS-BBBO-enhanced liquid biopsy using stable cavitation shows diagnostic potential for primary brain tumors. Further research is imperative before integrating FUS-BBBO for liquid biopsy enhancement into clinical practice.

Baseline and on Treatment Biodistribution Variability of 18 F-FLT Uptake in Patients With Advanced Melanoma: Brief Communication.

PURPOSE: This prospective study evaluates the biodistribution of 18 F-FLT PET in patients with advanced melanoma before and after treatment with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighteen BRAF-positive unresectable stage IIIc or IV melanoma patients referred for 18 F-FLT PET/CT before (BL) and during (D14) BRAF/MEK inhibition were included. 18 F-FLT accumulation in the liver, bone marrow, blood, and muscle was quantified. RESULTS: Baseline interpatient 18 F-FLT uptake had a coefficient-of-variation between 17.5% and 21.5%. During treatment, liver uptake increased (SUV meanBL = 4.86 ± 0.98, SUV meanD14 = 6.31 ± 1.36, P < 0.001) and bone marrow uptake decreased (SUV meanBL = 7.67 ± 1.65, SUV meanD14 = 6.78 ± 1.19, P < 0.025). Both changes were unrelated to baseline metabolic tumor volume or tumor response. CONCLUSIONS: To assess 18 F-FLT PET, both liver and bone marrow uptake may be used as normal tissue references at baseline, but 18 F-FLT biodistribution significantly changes in longitudinal response studies when treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors.

Maximizing treatment opportunities: assessing protocol waivers' impact on safety and outcome in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol.

PURPOSE: Although eligibility criteria are essential in trial design, overly restrictive criteria contribute to low accrual and limited generalizability. To enhance trial inclusivity, there has been growing interest in broadening eligibility criteria, especially for patients with advanced or treatment-refractory disease. Yet, the impact on patient safety remains uncertain. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), protocol exceptions are frequently requested and occasionally granted. Here we describe the impact of these waivers on treatment safety and efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: DRUP is a multicenter, non-randomized clinical basket trial treating therapy-refractory cancer patients with molecularly targeted- and immunotherapies outside their registered indications (NCT02925234). Here, all granted waivers were revised, analyzed in terms of safety and efficacy outcome, and compared with outcomes of included patients that did not receive a waiver. RESULTS: Between September 1st 2016 and September 1st 2021, protocol waivers were granted for 82 patients (8%) out of 1019 included patients in DRUP. Most waivers (45%) were granted for general- or drug-related eligibility criteria, other categories were out-of-window testing, treatment and testing exceptions. Serious adverse event rate was similar between patients that received a waiver (pW) and patients that did not (pNW): 39% vs. 41%, respectively (P=0.81). The clinical benefit (either objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks) rate of pW was 40% versus 33% in pNW (P=0.43). CONCLUSION: Safety and clinical benefit were preserved in patients for whom a waiver was granted. These data support a more personalized approach in assessing eligibility criteria, especially in trials with widely used and approved drugs accruing patients without other treatment options.